Topic: Church tells man-hungry women to lower standards

[Papist]

 The rest of us? Eh...better either luck out or get used to being alone if you're going to insist on having a guy who is a pretty boy, with a body builder's body, also smart and cultured, able to cook, in touch with his feelings or whatever, gets along with all your friends and family, etc.

I think you just described a gay man. Is that what women are looking for? 

[dzheremi]

Wow Thank you, Papist. I really just thought of the opposite of myself, given my spectacular success with the ladies. And to think I had thought it was because I'm not much to look at (definitely don't meet the tall requirement, either). It's a relief to find out that I'm really just too manly for them to handle.

[Maria]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

[Papist]

Wow Thank you, Papist. I really just thought of the opposite of myself, given my spectacular success with the ladies. And to think I had thought it was because I'm not much to look at (definitely don't meet the tall requirement, either). It's a relief to find out that I'm really just too manly for them to handle.

Turns out you are dripping with masculinity.   

[vamrat]

 The rest of us? Eh...better either luck out or get used to being alone if you're going to insist on having a guy who is a pretty boy, with a body builder's body, also smart and cultured, able to cook, in touch with his feelings or whatever, gets along with all your friends and family, etc.

I think you just described a gay man. Is that what women are looking for? 

Bloodhound Gang - I wish I was queer so I could get chicks.

[Maria]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

Oh, I just remembered that she also passed his second test as well.

He took her and his five children on a fishing trip the next Saturday. She put worms on the children's fishing rods and helped them catch some pretty terrific trout, which she cleaned and cooked for their dinner.

She was quite a catch herself.

[Hiwot]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

The article didn't say "single fathers", but "single men". Quite a difference.

Point was about the second clause "those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Fair enough. But excluding "single men" makes this whole "study" a crock.

especialy when it ends up concluding from such a data, that there is 'a dire man drought' it just seems to want to call the women up there bunch of gold diggers without saying it outright.

[witega]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

[jewish voice]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

The article didn't say "single fathers", but "single men". Quite a difference.

Point was about the second clause "those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Fair enough. But excluding "single men" makes this whole "study" a crock.

especialy when it ends up concluding from such a data, that there is 'a dire man drought' it just seems to want to call the women up there bunch of gold diggers without saying it outright.

I didn't really think that they need to spell it out. Everyone knows that women are gold diggers 

[dzheremi]

especialy when it ends up concluding from such a data, that there is 'a dire man drought' it just seems to want to call the women up there bunch of gold diggers without saying it outright.

Up there? Where do you live?

Your comment brings me back to my childhood, as my mother worked for years as an office assistant for a pediatrician who happened to be Australian (wouldn't be right to call her a receptionist when she also weighed the kids, took their temperature, and the other preliminaries). I remember sitting in his office as a child and staring at a big map he had hung on one wall that looked like this:



At least we know if the women of Australia are having trouble finding men, it's not due to a lack of confidence!

[Hiwot]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

Thank you,Witega you said it ma bro! LOL

[jnorm888]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

It's just that it takes two and so the other person may want something different. I'm almost 35 and so it's getting harder and harder to find someone who:

1.) Wasn't married before

2.) Doesn't have any kids


Most of my dates have been with non Orthodox women. It's extremely difficult to find a single Orthodox woman around my age who was never married before and who doesn't already have children.

[Hiwot]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

The article didn't say "single fathers", but "single men". Quite a difference.

Point was about the second clause "those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Fair enough. But excluding "single men" makes this whole "study" a crock.

especially when it ends up concluding from such a data, that there is 'a dire man drought' it just seems to want to call the women up there bunch of gold diggers without saying it outright.

I didn't really think that they need to spell it out. Everyone knows that women are gold diggers 

The way I see it more often than not, the exchange is a fair one, between certain two characters among the genders: man wants a trophy wife, woman wants gold nuggets. they both  knew what they want and get what they want. as they saying goes ' it takes two to tango'. Real women and men, don't have enough media coverage.

[Hiwot]

especialy when it ends up concluding from such a data, that there is 'a dire man drought' it just seems to want to call the women up there bunch of gold diggers without saying it outright.

Up there? Where do you live?

Your comment brings me back to my childhood, as my mother worked for years as an office assistant for a pediatrician who happened to be Australian (wouldn't be right to call her a receptionist when she also weighed the kids, took their temperature, and the other preliminaries). I remember sitting in his office as a child and staring at a big map he had hung on one wall that looked like this:



At least we know if the women of Australia are having trouble finding men, it's not due to a lack of confidence!

hahaha, talk about perspective! I saw the difference between  who is at the center of the map, depending on where you are. people of each continent apparently think that they are the center of the world, or on top of it lol

I guess the women of Australia, have enough reason to be picky, them being on the top of the world, mere mortals must not be too appealing.

perhaps those on Mt. Olympus might have a chance.

[Hiwot]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

The problem I would see with that is, marriage is a whole lot more than raising kids. Even if it was just that, it will still require that the husband and wife be in a real relationship with one another to raise the kids grow up to be decent human beings. if mom and dad, love and like one another, respect one another, share a friendship with one another, are loyal to one another, are there for one another, then kids growing up in that kind of home will grow up being decent human beings; who also other things being equal, will be more likely to have a good relationship and in turn be better parents themselves.

There is a lot wrong in what the man did, assuming ofc its all that he did, to decide on who to marry. he is setting everyone including his kids for a major disappointment IMHO

[ialmisry]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

The problem I would see with that is, marriage is a whole lot more than raising kids. Even if it was just that, it will still require that the husband and wife be in a real relationship with one another to raise the kids grow up to be decent human beings. if mom and dad, love and like one another, respect one another, share a friendship with one another, are loyal to one another, are there for one another, then kids growing up in that kind of home will grow up being decent human beings; who also other things being equal, will be more likely to have a good relationship and in turn be better parents themselves.

There is a lot wrong in what the man did, assuming ofc its all that he did, to decide on who to marry. he is setting everyone including his kids for a major disappointment IMHO

I remember when I used to take my niece out to the playground etc., and the attention I would get from women, including those who didn't have any kids.  I often wondered what they were thinking, as they never asked, and I didn't say, that she was my niece, not my daughter.  I mean, I see a woman with a kid and I think, where's Mr. Kid?

You're right, despite what the well intentioned and moral say, marriage is NOT all about raising children.  They are the corrollary to marriage, and marriage is the context in which they occur (ideally).  But they are not the purpose of marriage.

However, if you have children, you have to find someone who is right for them, because until you are married, your first loyalty is to your children.  After you are married, it is to your spouse.  Hence, choose wisely.   Looking for someone as another parent for your kids, however, is using them as surely using them for sex would be.

[ZealousZeal]

I'm not married, but I hope if I ever am blessed in that way I will keep in mind Louis CK's sage wisdom on the subject of being content with your spouse: "Some things do get easier as you've married for a while, you start to understand each other better, and you start looking at yourself more. You spend a lot of your marriage looking at the other person and trying to change them or figure them out, then you start realizing what you're bringing to the table, and you blame them less for [stuff]."

I think if more people had this kind of attitude when looking for/at their mate, we'd all be a lot happier. Or everybody's just crazy. I dunno.

Louis CK is so hilarious.

[Hiwot]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

The problem I would see with that is, marriage is a whole lot more than raising kids. Even if it was just that, it will still require that the husband and wife be in a real relationship with one another to raise the kids grow up to be decent human beings. if mom and dad, love and like one another, respect one another, share a friendship with one another, are loyal to one another, are there for one another, then kids growing up in that kind of home will grow up being decent human beings; who also other things being equal, will be more likely to have a good relationship and in turn be better parents themselves.

There is a lot wrong in what the man did, assuming ofc its all that he did, to decide on who to marry. he is setting everyone including his kids for a major disappointment IMHO

I remember when I used to take my niece out to the playground etc., and the attention I would get from women, including those who didn't have any kids.  I often wondered what they were thinking, as they never asked, and I didn't say, that she was my niece, not my daughter.  I mean, I see a woman with a kid and I think, where's Mr. Kid?

You're right, despite what the well intentioned and moral say, marriage is NOT all about raising children.  They are the corrollary to marriage, and marriage is the context in which they occur (ideally).  But they are not the purpose of marriage.

However, if you have children, you have to find someone who is right for them, because until you are married, your first loyalty is to your children.  After you are married, it is to your spouse.  Hence, choose wisely.   Looking for someone as another parent for your kids, however, is using them as surely using them for sex would be.

Wow Isa, I couldn't agree more, on both points. very well said.

[dzheremi]

I'm not married, but I hope if I ever am blessed in that way I will keep in mind Louis CK's sage wisdom on the subject of being content with your spouse: "Some things do get easier as you've married for a while, you start to understand each other better, and you start looking at yourself more. You spend a lot of your marriage looking at the other person and trying to change them or figure them out, then you start realizing what you're bringing to the table, and you blame them less for [stuff]."

I think if more people had this kind of attitude when looking for/at their mate, we'd all be a lot happier. Or everybody's just crazy. I dunno.

Louis CK is so hilarious.

^^^ Gentlemen, I present to you the only litmus test of a woman's worthiness that there should ever be. Congratulations: You pass! Now I guess you go out and find your own Mexican-Hungarian Jew comedian...מזל טוב!

[ialmisry]

 The rest of us? Eh...better either luck out or get used to being alone if you're going to insist on having a guy who is a pretty boy, with a body builder's body, also smart and cultured, able to cook, in touch with his feelings or whatever, gets along with all your friends and family, etc.

I think you just described a gay man. Is that what women are looking for? 

sadly, yes it seems.

[JamesRottnek]

Wow Thank you, Papist. I really just thought of the opposite of myself, given my spectacular success with the ladies. And to think I had thought it was because I'm not much to look at (definitely don't meet the tall requirement, either). It's a relief to find out that I'm really just too manly for them to handle.

So gay people are womanly?

[Maria]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

The problem I would see with that is, marriage is a whole lot more than raising kids. Even if it was just that, it will still require that the husband and wife be in a real relationship with one another to raise the kids grow up to be decent human beings. if mom and dad, love and like one another, respect one another, share a friendship with one another, are loyal to one another, are there for one another, then kids growing up in that kind of home will grow up being decent human beings; who also other things being equal, will be more likely to have a good relationship and in turn be better parents themselves.

There is a lot wrong in what the man did, assuming ofc its all that he did, to decide on who to marry. he is setting everyone including his kids for a major disappointment IMHO

Wow! The couple have been happily married for many years now (at least 25 years).

I wonder how many other men and women test their prospective spouses before committing to them in Holy Matrimony (Holy Crowning? I know that I asked the Lord to help me. The sign I was looking for: that we would be drawn closer to Christ Jesus and that we would meet at a Christian event. My parents were also pleased. It was a win-win situation.

[Shiny]

Actually, height is more important to women than money, but money while a distant second is light years from whatever any woman says she wants.

Every, yes every, girl I have dated has said if I was not taller than them, they would not date me. Regardless of anything else.

Can she learn to speak proper American?

My god this is hilarious.

[vamrat]

Actually, height is more important to women than money, but money while a distant second is light years from whatever any woman says she wants.

Every, yes every, girl I have dated has said if I was not taller than them, they would not date me. Regardless of anything else.

I thank God for this blessing.  There will never be a woman who shoots me down because of my height.  (If she is taller than me, she's a freak of nature and would probably take what she could get!)

[Aindriú]

Actually, height is more important to women than money, but money while a distant second is light years from whatever any woman says she wants.

Every, yes every, girl I have dated has said if I was not taller than them, they would not date me. Regardless of anything else.

That's when you Friendzone THEM.

[vamrat]

Actually, height is more important to women than money, but money while a distant second is light years from whatever any woman says she wants.

Every, yes every, girl I have dated has said if I was not taller than them, they would not date me. Regardless of anything else.

That's when you Friendzone THEM.

Why would you friendzone them?  Just ditch them.  If you still be friends with them then you are giving them the emotional security and attention they desire while getting none of the emotional intimacy that should be your prerogative.  Ditch 'em and ignore 'em.  Move on because if a woman is not receptive, you should be putting your efforts towards the other 3.5 billion other candidates.

Remember, women are social creatures and have lots of friends.  They have two types of friends - boyfriends and girlfriends.  If you are the primary/sole recipient of their affections, you are their girlfriend.

[orthonorm]

Actually, height is more important to women than money, but money while a distant second is light years from whatever any woman says she wants.

Every, yes every, girl I have dated has said if I was not taller than them, they would not date me. Regardless of anything else.

That's when you Friendzone THEM.

Why?

He taller than they are. It's working.

Everyone has their requirements for a mate, some are just less honest about it.

Height is just one thing women in general are very open about.

[FormerReformer]

Actually, height is more important to women than money, but money while a distant second is light years from whatever any woman says she wants.

Every, yes every, girl I have dated has said if I was not taller than them, they would not date me. Regardless of anything else.

That's when you Friendzone THEM.

Why?

He taller than they are. It's working.

Everyone has their requirements for a mate, some are just less honest about it.

Height is just one thing women in general are very open about.

Oddly enough, I have one female friend that only dates men that are as short as or shorter than she is. And she's pretty short.

[LizaSymonenko]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

The problem I would see with that is, marriage is a whole lot more than raising kids. Even if it was just that, it will still require that the husband and wife be in a real relationship with one another to raise the kids grow up to be decent human beings. if mom and dad, love and like one another, respect one another, share a friendship with one another, are loyal to one another, are there for one another, then kids growing up in that kind of home will grow up being decent human beings; who also other things being equal, will be more likely to have a good relationship and in turn be better parents themselves.

There is a lot wrong in what the man did, assuming ofc its all that he did, to decide on who to marry. he is setting everyone including his kids for a major disappointment IMHO

I remember when I used to take my niece out to the playground etc., and the attention I would get from women, including those who didn't have any kids.  I often wondered what they were thinking, as they never asked, and I didn't say, that she was my niece, not my daughter.  I mean, I see a woman with a kid and I think, where's Mr. Kid?

You're right, despite what the well intentioned and moral say, marriage is NOT all about raising children.  They are the corrollary to marriage, and marriage is the context in which they occur (ideally).  But they are not the purpose of marriage.

However, if you have children, you have to find someone who is right for them, because until you are married, your first loyalty is to your children.  After you are married, it is to your spouse.  Hence, choose wisely.   Looking for someone as another parent for your kids, however, is using them as surely using them for sex would be.

I don't know what they discussed with you, but, perhaps women see a man with a child and assume that he IS married, and therefore, they can simply have a conversation with him, without him hitting on them, or him thinking they are hitting on him. 

As for what women are looking for....Sheesh, you guys have got it all wrong.  If it was just good looks and money, then over half the men in society wouldn't be married, and yet,.....they are.

What we truly look for in a man is someone we can trust.  TRUST.  ....because with trust, comes integrity.  If we TRUST that he will do what is best for the relationship (and the kids, if any come of the marriage), the woman can be "free" to worry about her womanly "duties".

Sure, you all quote about the wife having to be submissive to her husband.  You know, if the man truly had integrity, I don't think the wife would have a problem, because he wouldn't ask her to do something she wasn't comfortable with, or didn't agree to.

In short, I think women look for a truly faithful Orthodox man....because if he is "truly" Orthodox, in every sense, then he would be trustworthy and would have integrity.  Believe me, looks aren't even secondary....they fall somewhere at the bottom of the list.

[Ergib]

Some of us have high expectations and little to offer….. that could be the reason.

[Sauron]

Australia is apparently in the grip of a dire man drought, and the Catholic Church in Australia suggests women lower their expectations accordingly if they want to get hitched.

I never thought I would hear a church advise people to lower their standards.  This has got to be a first!
 

Western women have a real entitlement problem. He is giving good advice.

[LizaSymonenko]

Really?  How so?

[Punch]

Well, that explains a lot.  I agree with you wholeheartedly.  I also agree with the "trust" issue.  The people that I trust the most are all dead.  The living?  You need to keep an eye on them.

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

The problem I would see with that is, marriage is a whole lot more than raising kids. Even if it was just that, it will still require that the husband and wife be in a real relationship with one another to raise the kids grow up to be decent human beings. if mom and dad, love and like one another, respect one another, share a friendship with one another, are loyal to one another, are there for one another, then kids growing up in that kind of home will grow up being decent human beings; who also other things being equal, will be more likely to have a good relationship and in turn be better parents themselves.

There is a lot wrong in what the man did, assuming ofc its all that he did, to decide on who to marry. he is setting everyone including his kids for a major disappointment IMHO

I remember when I used to take my niece out to the playground etc., and the attention I would get from women, including those who didn't have any kids.  I often wondered what they were thinking, as they never asked, and I didn't say, that she was my niece, not my daughter.  I mean, I see a woman with a kid and I think, where's Mr. Kid?

You're right, despite what the well intentioned and moral say, marriage is NOT all about raising children.  They are the corrollary to marriage, and marriage is the context in which they occur (ideally).  But they are not the purpose of marriage.

However, if you have children, you have to find someone who is right for them, because until you are married, your first loyalty is to your children.  After you are married, it is to your spouse.  Hence, choose wisely.   Looking for someone as another parent for your kids, however, is using them as surely using them for sex would be.

I don't know what they discussed with you, but, perhaps women see a man with a child and assume that he IS married, and therefore, they can simply have a conversation with him, without him hitting on them, or him thinking they are hitting on him. 

As for what women are looking for....Sheesh, you guys have got it all wrong.  If it was just good looks and money, then over half the men in society wouldn't be married, and yet,.....they are.

What we truly look for in a man is someone we can trust.  TRUST.  ....because with trust, comes integrity.  If we TRUST that he will do what is best for the relationship (and the kids, if any come of the marriage), the woman can be "free" to worry about her womanly "duties".

Sure, you all quote about the wife having to be submissive to her husband.  You know, if the man truly had integrity, I don't think the wife would have a problem, because he wouldn't ask her to do something she wasn't comfortable with, or didn't agree to.

In short, I think women look for a truly faithful Orthodox man....because if he is "truly" Orthodox, in every sense, then he would be trustworthy and would have integrity.  Believe me, looks aren't even secondary....they fall somewhere at the bottom of the list.

[Orthodox11]

I agree with you wholeheartedly.  I also agree with the "trust" issue.  The people that I trust the most are all dead. 

The Egyptians are working on solving that problem, albeit only for 6 hours.

[Aindriú]

Actually, height is more important to women than money, but money while a distant second is light years from whatever any woman says she wants.

Every, yes every, girl I have dated has said if I was not taller than them, they would not date me. Regardless of anything else.

That's when you Friendzone THEM.

Why?

He taller than they are. It's working.

Everyone has their requirements for a mate, some are just less honest about it.

Height is just one thing women in general are very open about.

I misread he *was* taller.

Even still... 'cause it's fun.

[Aindriú]

Australia is apparently in the grip of a dire man drought, and the Catholic Church in Australia suggests women lower their expectations accordingly if they want to get hitched.

I never thought I would hear a church advise people to lower their standards.  This has got to be a first!
 

Western women have a real entitlement problem. He is giving good advice.

Women? You're talking about the whole current generation.

[Schultz]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

The problem I would see with that is, marriage is a whole lot more than raising kids. Even if it was just that, it will still require that the husband and wife be in a real relationship with one another to raise the kids grow up to be decent human beings. if mom and dad, love and like one another, respect one another, share a friendship with one another, are loyal to one another, are there for one another, then kids growing up in that kind of home will grow up being decent human beings; who also other things being equal, will be more likely to have a good relationship and in turn be better parents themselves.

There is a lot wrong in what the man did, assuming ofc its all that he did, to decide on who to marry. he is setting everyone including his kids for a major disappointment IMHO

I remember when I used to take my niece out to the playground etc., and the attention I would get from women, including those who didn't have any kids.  I often wondered what they were thinking, as they never asked, and I didn't say, that she was my niece, not my daughter.  I mean, I see a woman with a kid and I think, where's Mr. Kid?

You're right, despite what the well intentioned and moral say, marriage is NOT all about raising children.  They are the corrollary to marriage, and marriage is the context in which they occur (ideally).  But they are not the purpose of marriage.

However, if you have children, you have to find someone who is right for them, because until you are married, your first loyalty is to your children.  After you are married, it is to your spouse.  Hence, choose wisely.   Looking for someone as another parent for your kids, however, is using them as surely using them for sex would be.

I don't know what they discussed with you, but, perhaps women see a man with a child and assume that he IS married, and therefore, they can simply have a conversation with him, without him hitting on them, or him thinking they are hitting on him. 

As for what women are looking for....Sheesh, you guys have got it all wrong.  If it was just good looks and money, then over half the men in society wouldn't be married, and yet,.....they are.

What we truly look for in a man is someone we can trust.  TRUST.  ....because with trust, comes integrity.  If we TRUST that he will do what is best for the relationship (and the kids, if any come of the marriage), the woman can be "free" to worry about her womanly "duties".

Sure, you all quote about the wife having to be submissive to her husband.  You know, if the man truly had integrity, I don't think the wife would have a problem, because he wouldn't ask her to do something she wasn't comfortable with, or didn't agree to.

In short, I think women look for a truly faithful Orthodox man....because if he is "truly" Orthodox, in every sense, then he would be trustworthy and would have integrity.  Believe me, looks aren't even secondary....they fall somewhere at the bottom of the list.

AMEN, sister! 

[Melodist]

Actually, height is more important to women than money, but money while a distant second is light years from whatever any woman says she wants.

I just happen to have neither one of those characteristics.

[Sauron]

Really?  How so?

I will break it down for you. Stop me when it starts to sound familiar.

In the West, women now spend their twenties and thirties pursuing careers, going their own way, and generally saying "look at me, I got moxie and I'm going places". Well, these years also happen to be when women are the most physically attractive and when they are in their best child-bearing years.

Suddenly, in the early to mid-30s, there is a mad dash to catch a man. (the fish needs a bicycle after all). Unfortunately for them, the good men are largely off the market because they have chosen the women who decided not to squander the looks and fertility of their most marriageable years on an important career in social work or human resources. Meanwhile, our modern women have said, "I will marry after I do all this important stuff, take it or leave it!" That is their right, but it is also the right of men to "leave it". There is no obligation for them to "man up" and rescue them from the consequences of their choices.

[ialmisry]

Really?  How so?

I will break it down for you. Stop me when it starts to sound familiar.

In the West, women now spend their twenties and thirties pursuing careers, going their own way, and generally saying "look at me, I got moxie and I'm going places". Well, these years also happen to be when women are the most physically attractive and when they are in their best child-bearing years.

Suddenly, in the early to mid-30s, there is a mad dash to catch a man. (the fish needs a bicycle after all). Unfortunately for them, the good men are largely off the market because they have chosen the women who decided not to squander the looks and fertility of their most marriageable years on an important career in social work or human resources. Meanwhile, our modern women have said, "I will marry after I do all this important stuff, take it or leave it!" That is their right, but it is also the right of men to "leave it". There is no obligation for them to "man up" and rescue them from the consequences of their choices.

reality sinks in.

[ialmisry]

I agree with you wholeheartedly.  I also agree with the "trust" issue.  The people that I trust the most are all dead.  

The Egyptians are working on solving that problem, albeit only for 6 hours.

A-HEM.  Muslim Egyptians.  I like my women warm and breathing.  And responsive.

[Melodist]

What we truly look for in a man is someone we can trust. 

I doubt that.

[dzheremi]

I agree with Sauron, but also in a way with Aindriu, as I have known plenty of men who are past their prime or otherwise have little to offer who whine incessantly about how they can't find a good woman and all that, despite doing little to work on themselves. Again, we should all just follow Louis CK's advice: Take a look at what you bring to the table, be honest with yourself, and you'll have less critical things to say about a potential mate. It works for women and men equally, though neither seem to follow it very often.

[ialmisry]

"Single fathers and those earning less than $60,000 a year were excluded from the study."

Maybe the "study" should lower "its" expectations before telling women to.  Do I hear any bids for $55,000?

Those exclusions are ridiculous, and limit a woman's opportunities.

Ever seen the movie: Yours, Mine, and Ours. Funny but a true story.

In Los Angeles, it was reported years ago in the local Catholic newspaper that a married man who had just lost his wife to cancer, but who had five children, took different single women in his parish to the same restaurant each Saturday night. He would order the same dinner for each of his children and for him and his date: Lobster. Well, he had just about run out of dates, when he met his future wife. All the other women had failed the test, but this one lady passed his scrutiny when she cracked open all the lobster legs and cut up the meat for each of his five children. When she got to her own lobster, it was then COLD. He was looking for someone who was selfless and who could be a Mother to his children. She did exactly that. At last report, they were still very happily married.

a) sounds like he was interviewing for a nanny rather than looking for a wife.
b) if he could afford 7 lobster dinners every weekend, it's not hard to see where he got the sense of entitlement to approach the search for his new nanny as an interview process.
c) if after watching him order lobster for his 5 kids and then not lifting a finger to help his *own* kids crack the shells, she still wanted him, she's welcome to him.

I had a number of women approach me because they were looking for a father figure for their kids. And so some people do want a wife or husband who could also be a nanny/mentor figure as well.


I personally don't see anything wrong with that for if that's what they want then that's what they want.

The problem I would see with that is, marriage is a whole lot more than raising kids. Even if it was just that, it will still require that the husband and wife be in a real relationship with one another to raise the kids grow up to be decent human beings. if mom and dad, love and like one another, respect one another, share a friendship with one another, are loyal to one another, are there for one another, then kids growing up in that kind of home will grow up being decent human beings; who also other things being equal, will be more likely to have a good relationship and in turn be better parents themselves.

There is a lot wrong in what the man did, assuming ofc its all that he did, to decide on who to marry. he is setting everyone including his kids for a major disappointment IMHO

I remember when I used to take my niece out to the playground etc., and the attention I would get from women, including those who didn't have any kids.  I often wondered what they were thinking, as they never asked, and I didn't say, that she was my niece, not my daughter.  I mean, I see a woman with a kid and I think, where's Mr. Kid?

You're right, despite what the well intentioned and moral say, marriage is NOT all about raising children.  They are the corrollary to marriage, and marriage is the context in which they occur (ideally).  But they are not the purpose of marriage.

However, if you have children, you have to find someone who is right for them, because until you are married, your first loyalty is to your children.  After you are married, it is to your spouse.  Hence, choose wisely.   Looking for someone as another parent for your kids, however, is using them as surely using them for sex would be.

I don't know what they discussed with you, but, perhaps women see a man with a child and assume that he IS married, and therefore, they can simply have a conversation with him, without him hitting on them, or him thinking they are hitting on him.

They discussed me with me. I know platonic conversation. I have plenty of them with the mothers at Church, for instance.

As for not hitting on them, see when Harry enlightened Sally
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYCpHyGSNqc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuSyX2d1tbY&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL033A2FDF242E33B2 

As for what women are looking for....Sheesh, you guys have got it all wrong.  If it was just good looks and money, then over half the men in society wouldn't be married, and yet,.....they are.

there is always stupidity

Drew Walter Peterson (born January 5, 1954) is a former Bolingbrook, Illinois, police sergeant who is suspected of killing his third and fourth wives....On February 21, 2008, Glasgow announced that a pathologist determined that Savio's death was a homicide, adding that the death had been investigated as such reopening the case following the exhumation.  Rev. Neil Schori, a pastor at Stacy Peterson's church, reported that Stacy had told him that Drew had killed Kathleen Savio and had made it look like an accident and that she was afraid of her husband.  Stacy had provided Drew's alibi for his whereabouts on the evening on which Kathleen Savio died...Peterson married Stacy Ann Cales (born January 20, 1984) on October 18, 2003. She disappeared on October 28, 2007. Stacy Peterson was officially reported missing in the early hours of October 29, 2007, after her sister, Cassandra Cales, failed to hear from her when expected...In December 2008, Drew Peterson's publicist Glenn Selig confirmed that Peterson was engaged to a 23-year-old, Christina Raines; she would be his fifth wife. On January 30, 2009, it was made public that Raines had moved out of Peterson's house. Her father, Ernie Raines, had issued an ultimatum, having her choose between him or Peterson. Raines had issued the ultimatum to his daughter because he didn't like the way Peterson began to control Christina; he was also scared that she would disappear as Stacy had. Raines moved out of Peterson's home "when she came to her senses", calling the engagement a publicity stunt designed to keep Peterson in the media spotlight. Then, in February 2009, Christina Raines and Peterson appeared on NBC's Today Show, confirming that she had moved back in with Peterson. Though his divorce from his fourth wife Stacy is not yet final, Peterson said he hopes to marry "as soon as possible". Christina Raines said her father made it clear he would not attend their wedding; she also admitted none of her friends or family support the relationship. When asked by NBC's Amy Robach if they would like to have more children, Peterson responded, "We have enough, we have 8 between us" (apparently including in the count his adult children, as there are only 6 children living in the home: the two he had with Kathleen Savio, the two he had with Stacy, and Christina's own two). Christina Raines replied, in a question-like tone, "Maybe one more?" When asked why she is with Peterson, Raines said, "I love him, he makes me laugh", and claimed to have no concern for her safety.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Peterson#2008_engagement_to_Christina_Raines

What we truly look for in a man is someone we can trust.  TRUST.  ....because with trust, comes integrity.  If we TRUST that he will do what is best for the relationship (and the kids, if any come of the marriage), the woman can be "free" to worry about her womanly "duties".

Unfortunately most men have the experience of women using them for friendship while they go after the "bad boys."  Except, of course, the bad boys. 

Some women do look for trust, but it is far from universal, and every man knows it.

Sure, you all quote about the wife having to be submissive to her husband.  You know, if the man truly had integrity, I don't think the wife would have a problem, because he wouldn't ask her to do something she wasn't comfortable with, or didn't agree to.

LOL. Unfortunately, 'tis not so.

In short, I think women look for a truly faithful Orthodox man....because if he is "truly" Orthodox, in every sense, then he would be trustworthy and would have integrity.  Believe me, looks aren't even secondary....they fall somewhere at the bottom of the list.

unfortunately I know too many counter examples to your good example Liza.

[LizaSymonenko]

What we truly look for in a man is someone we can trust. 

I doubt that.

...then you don't really know women.

Really?  How so?

I will break it down for you. Stop me when it starts to sound familiar.

In the West, women now spend their twenties and thirties pursuing careers, going their own way, and generally saying "look at me, I got moxie and I'm going places". Well, these years also happen to be when women are the most physically attractive and when they are in their best child-bearing years.

Suddenly, in the early to mid-30s, there is a mad dash to catch a man. (the fish needs a bicycle after all). Unfortunately for them, the good men are largely off the market because they have chosen the women who decided not to squander the looks and fertility of their most marriageable years on an important career in social work or human resources. Meanwhile, our modern women have said, "I will marry after I do all this important stuff, take it or leave it!" That is their right, but it is also the right of men to "leave it". There is no obligation for them to "man up" and rescue them from the consequences of their choices.

There's two feet here, and let me tell you about the other shoe.

Men lately have commitment issues.  They simply want to milk the cow and not buy it. 

I'll bet you that well over half of those women you claim don't get married in their early years, don't, because the men won't commit.  They all have "boyfriends"....but, the men are the ones who don't want to get married right now.

Why marry her, if you are only going to divorce her in a few years, and then have to split your wealth, etc.  Many men (even some comments on this forum) treat marriage as a joke or a burden.  Believe me, women don't want to be a burden to any man.

...and let's be honest about men in today's society.  You blame the women for going out to work.....this is the downfall of the family.  However, that woman who works at the office all day, still is the main childcarer, food preparer and cleaner upper.  So, don't think women have it "easier" these days and are shirking their responsibilities.  On the contrary, their responsibilities have simply increased....not even mentioning elder-care.

It's a society issue, not a woman issue.....  the couple wants the bigger house, the new hybrid vehicle, etc.....all of which they cannot obtain on a single income.  They need two incomes to fulfill their "dreams".   Both parties are just as guilty....and it's their children who suffer, grow up with minimal supervision and a skewed view of what is truly important in this life.

...one more thing.  When you men are sizing up your prospective spouse....you look at her beauty....and if she catches your eye because she's either voluptuous, blonde or stick thin....you wonder what it is she "does" for a living.  Therefore, YOU expect that woman to be gainfully employed.

If she were unemployed at age 27, living with and off her parents, I'll bet most of you wouldn't give her a second thought.  Be honest with yourselves.